Gray believes presbytery’s affidavits tied to PCUSA’s hardball legal strategies
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, August 17, 2006
In April, the Presbytery of Eastern Oklahoma filed affidavits in 62 counties intended to encumber all of the property owned by the presbytery’s congregations.
At the time, Dr. Thomas W. Gray protested the affidavits, saying that they were specifically aimed at Kirk of the Hills Presbyterian Church in Tulsa, the largest and fastest growing congregation in the presbytery. Under Gray’s leadership, Kirk of the Hills has been strongly critical of many of the policies and actions of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
Presbytery officials disagreed. They said the affidavits were primarily in response to a few Native American congregations that had encumbered or sold property without presbytery approval. But they said they filed them against all congregations to be fair.
In July, at the meeting of the New Wineskins Association of Churches that was hosted by Kirk of the Hills, Gray addressed the issue amid widespread reports of coercion from denominational officials. But no one offered any proof of such coercion.
Gray mentioned the presbytery’s “affidavit of ownership” filed against Kirk of the Hills and other congregations in the presbytery.
“Having clouded our title, the presbytery left us no option other than to respond in court,” Gray said. Kirk of the Hills called a meeting of the congregation and adopted amendments to its corporate documents, affirming the congregation’s absolute title and control of its property. Gray said that when he reported the action to his presbytery executive, the executive replied, “‘You have done what you felt you needed to do. Now we must do what we must do.'”
On August 9, The Layman Online published the “privileged and confidential” documents that urged presbyteries to take aggressive action to claim church property from congregations that are considering leaving the denomination.
Gray read the documents and wrote an assessment on his blog site. “Two things disturb me most in all this. First is the secrecy, coupled with the timing. The PCUSA officials did not respond to congregations taking any action – they prepared way in advance to stifle even any conversation. They well knew that this last GA would create divisive conflict. Instead of fostering open discussion, they studiously developed a plan that, in the best light, stifles the free speech of Presbyterians.
“Second, the denomination is very selective about what it takes a stand on. If congregations are legitimately disturbed by unPresbyterian and unbiblical decisions they are set up for attack simply for discussing their alternatives. On the other hand, the national denomination has refused to take any action or stand against congregations that have openly ordained GLBTs or participated in same-sex marriages, even though this clearly goes against the Consititution.”
He also wrote a letter to The Layman Online, saying, “Eastern Oklahoma Presbytery, as was reported by The Layman, filed affidavits on every piece of church property in Eastern Oklahoma. When we confronted them with this, they kept up a subterfuge that they filed ‘because of some property problems with Native American churches in south Oklahoma.’ According to them, it had nothing to do with churches potentially leaving the denomination.
“Now, reading the PCUSA directives, it is obvious that they’ve been following the playbook and consistently, repeatedly lying to us. Is this a denomination that can make self-righteous statements about ‘the true church’ while it lambastes anyone who is struggling to find a reason to remain in the PCUSA? Disgusting.”
The documents that The Layman Online published were presented by PCUSA lawyers to a number of presbytery executives during a private meeting in January. Media requests to be allowed to cover the meeting were turned down.
The presbytery executives were warned not to make the documents public. The Layman Online received its copies anonymously in an envelope with no return address.